ARE PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS PUZZLE OR REAL? FOCUS ON WITTGENSTEIN AND POPPER DEBATE
ARE PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS PUZZLE OR REAL? FOCUS ON WITTGENSTEIN AND POPPER DEBATE

Summary/Abstract: Wittgenstein believes that there is no foundation of ‘philosophical problems’. ‘Philosophical problems arise as a result of misuse of language. He believes that when one is unclear about the correct use of a word, he is puzzled and trapped in a ‘philosophical problem’. Wittgenstein suggests a rational inquiry into the correct use of language. Karl Popper is not satisfied with this claim. He argues that ‘philosophical problems’ do not arise as a result of misuse of language. Most of the philosophical problems are real and have a foundation in science. For Popper, the criterion of genuine problems is its practicality. If there is a practical context of a problem, then the problem will be genuine. He suggests a proper understanding of the extra-philosophical context of ‘philosophical problems’. This paper explores that the disagreement between Wittgenstein and Karl Popper over the issue of the nature of ‘philosophical problems’ is because of their contrary views about reality. Wittgenstein limits himself to mere linguistic analysis. He believes that language is autonomous and prior to reality. But for Popper truth or falsity of proposed theories is the real aim as he believes that reality is prior to language. This study concludes that Popper’s approach provides a plausible ground to bridge the gap between science and philosophy. Popper’s idea of extra-philosophical context of ‘philosophical problem’ is a convincing idea that can save philosophy from mere meaningless verbiage and abstraction.

• Details
• Contents